In 2016 Google CEO Sundar Pichai announced<\/a> that \u201cin the long run, we\u2019re evolving in computing from a \u2018mobile-first\u2019 to an \u2018AI-first\u2019 world.\u201d<\/p>\n In 2018, he famously told Kara Swisher<\/a> that AI is \u201cone of the most important things that humanity is working on. It\u2019s more profound than, I don\u2019t know, electricity or fire.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s generally over-looked that he opened that statement by saying<\/a> \u201cWe don\u2019t take a very optimistic view of AI\u201d and closed by responding to Swisher\u2019s comment that \u201cfire is pretty good\u201d with \u201c(fire) kills people too, we have learned to harness fire for the benefits of humanity but we have to overcome its downsides too.\u201d<\/p>\n And yet, just over four years later Pichai, by then also CEO of Google\u2019s parent company, Alphabet, issued a \u2018code red\u2019 and directed multiple department heads including those in charge of research, trust, and safety \u201cto switch gears to assist in the development and launch of AI prototypes and products.\u201d<\/p>\n This directional switch took place only three weeks after the launch of OpenAI\u2019s ChatGPT product. <\/p>\n At the time, The New York Times<\/em> warned<\/a> that \u201cbecause these new chat bots learn their skills by analyzing huge amounts of data posted to the internet, they have a way of blending fiction with fact\u201d and \u201cthat could turn people against Google and damage the corporate brand it has spent decades building.\u201d<\/p>\n The Times also quoted University of Washington professor Margaret O\u2019Mara saying, \u201cFor companies that have become extraordinarily successful doing one market-defining thing, it is hard to have a second act with something entirely different.\u201d<\/p>\n That was in late 2022, as of mid-year 2025, it is clear that Pichai has damaged Google\u2019s brand and its core search product in a seemingly competition with OpenAI.<\/p>\n As I tried to understand what Pichai was doing, my initial framework was Cory Doctorow\u2019s \u201censhittification\u201d<\/a> concept defined as<\/a> when \u201cvendors create high-quality offerings to attract users, then they degrade those offerings to better serve business customers, and finally degrade their services to users and business customers to maximize profits for shareholders.\u201d<\/p>\n Over the past year I\u2019ve found Ed Zitron\u2019s analysis of Google\u2019s decision-making has deepened my understanding of WTF Pichai is up to. I\u2019ll come back to Zitron in a moment, but for those new to his work, I\u2019d recommend giving these three pieces a quick skim:<\/p>\n I\u2019ve also found pioneering AI researcher Gary Marcus\u2019 work<\/a> very useful \u2014 he flagged most of the limitations of LLM AI decades ago and has been consistently vindicated in his skepticism that the current OpenAI and Alphabet approach to AI will truly prove \u201cas important as fire.\u201d We\u2019ll come back to Marcus too. <\/p>\n But first I want to touch on an idea that Naked Capitalism readers have seen recently in another context via Curro Jimenez: nihilism<\/a>. <\/p>\n Curro was quoting the French sociologist Emmanuel Todd\u2019s analysis<\/a> of Israel\u2019s recent behavior in Gaza and Iran and this quote jumped out at me: \u201cPerhaps in the unconscious depths of the Israeli psyche, being Israeli today is no longer about being Jewish \u2014 it\u2019s about fighting the Arabs.\u201d<\/p>\n I would argue that for Pichai and those remaining at Google under his leadership, being Google today is no longer about being the dominant search engine \u2014 it\u2019s about fighting OpenAi\/ChatGPT.<\/p>\n On Wednesday, I\u2019ll be applying Todd\u2019s formulation to the current leadership of the Democratic party which is no longer about being the party of the working class but rather it\u2019s about fighting off the progressive wing of the party.<\/p>\n Now, let\u2019s dive into Ed Zitron\u2019s explanation of why Google is willing to risk its incredibly lucrative core search business<\/a> and maybe even destroy the open web itself<\/a> in a quest to compete with Open AI.<\/p>\n Zitron is an effective polemicist<\/a> so let\u2019s let him cook a little:<\/p>\n Google no longer provides the \u201cbest\u201d result or answer to your query \u2013 it provides the answer that it believes is most beneficial or profitable to Google. Google Search provides a \u201cfree\u201d service, but the cost is a source of information corrupted by a profit-seeking entity looking to manipulate you into giving money to the profit-seeking entities that pay them.<\/p>\n The net result is a product that completely sucks.<\/p>\n \u2026That\u2019s because Google has, like every major tech company, focused entirely on what will make revenues increase, even if the cost of doing so is destroying its entire legacy. Google has announced their own \u201cBard AI\u201d to compete with Bing\u2019s ChatGPT integration<\/a>, and I\u2019ll be honest \u2013 I feel a little crazy that nobody is saying the truth, which is that Google broke the product that made them famous and is now productizing fixing their own problem as innovation. Zitron expanded on these ideas in his \u201cBusiness Idiot<\/a>\u201d piece: <\/p>\n Our economy is run by people that don\u2019t participate in it and our tech companies are directed by people that don\u2019t experience the problems they allege to solve for their customers, as the modern executive is no longer a person with demands or responsibilities beyond their allegiance to shareholder value.<\/p>\n The incentives behind effectively everything we do have been broken by decades of neoliberal thinking, where the idea of a company \u2014 an entity created to do a thing in exchange for money \u2014has been drained of all meaning beyond the continued domination and extraction of everything around it, focusing heavily on short-term gains and growth at all costs. In doing so, the definition of a \u201cgood business\u201d has changed from one that makes good products at a fair price to a sustainable and loyal market, to one that can display the most stock price growth from quarter to quarter. <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Ewan Morrison elegantly summarized why Pinchai\u2019s commitment to AI is so riskly to its search business and the Open Web itself:<\/p>\n One drop of sewage in a glass of water turns the entire glass into sewage. \u2014 Ewan Morrison (@MrEwanMorrison) June 19, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n And like Captain Ahab, Pinchai knows he must have a crew just as dedicated to his suicidal mission as he is. He might not be nailing a gold coin to the mast and demanding loyalty oaths, but he is aggressively pushing buy-out offers on Googlers<\/a> who are not down with the program:<\/p>\n Remember Google is offering buyouts to employees who aren\u2019t all-in on how the company is doing things and it\u2019s \u201cAI first\u201d direction. Sadly, I have to think that still working for Google at this point means they support what\u2019s happened and how the company intends to become an an answer engine. <\/p>\n \u2014 Katherine Argent (@effthealgorithm) June 21, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n
\n
\u2026
Venture capital and the public markets don\u2019t actually reward or respect \u201cgood\u201d businesses or \u201cgood\u201d CEOs \u2013 they reward people that can steer the kind of growth that raises the value of an asset. \u2026Sundar Pichai isn\u2019t paid $280 million a year<\/a> because he\u2019s a \u201cgood CEO.\u201d After all, Google has all but destroyed its search product. He\u2019s paid because he finds ways to increase the overall growth of the company (even while their cloud division still loses money<\/a>), and thus the stock goes up.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n
\n
This is happening with AI hallucinated facts on the internet. AI systems have 48% error margins & are turning our historical, news, philosophical & scientific info on the net into sewage.
Do not drink it. pic.twitter.com\/nN0dhV9Dg2<\/a><\/p>\n\n
![\"Print](\"https:\/\/cdn.printfriendly.com\/buttons\/print-button-gray.png\")
<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n